click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130423
20130423
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
shining moment. however, think about bush-cheney and think about obama administration. fbi under bush-cheney, would they have been -- would they have interrogated him? would they have brought him in and spent more time with tamerlan years ago in 2009 when they had his name on the list? when his name popped up on the list would they have gone after them, or was there pc stuff at work where the obama administration says, look, we are not going to go after him right now. he has been cleared. let's not take a look now and let's not follow him. my concern is the treatment of terror under obama is different than the treatment of terror under bush-cheney. obama doesn't want to call it terror. he wants to call it -- i don't know. >> the fort hood one was classified as workplace violence. i don't know if they would claim a do over on that one. greg, you talked about the fbi on saturday when we had our special show. as we have gone over the past two days, even this morning there was something that said that perhaps one of the airlines misspelled one of these characters' names. tsarnaev is not t
. bush's nominees and two of president obama's nominees. so i ask consent to put in the record this summary of president obama's nominations, along with an article from "the washington post" that points out that president obama's nominees have been confirmed more rapidly than those of the last three presidents in his first term. i ask consent to put that in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: thank you, mr. president. now, to be more specific about the -- about these matters, let's take circuit court judicial confirmations in president obama's first term. according to our research, the average time for president obama's nominees was 240 days. that's faster than president george w. bush, 277 days from nomination to confirmation. so circuit court judicial confirmations, which are usually the subject of great interest around here, president obama treated better than president george w. bush. slightly better. first-term district court nominees -- the obama average time, 221 days, is slower than george w. bush, 156 days from nomination to considerati
about under bush have continued under obama, just with a rebranding. >> let me ask this question of emma. i want to reread a statement from the kremlin about the aftermath of boston. the russian and u.s. president have agreed by telephone to increase cooperation on counterterrorism following the boston marathon bombings. the kremlin said on saturday both sides underline their interest 234 deepening the close cooperation of the russian and u.s. special services in the fight against international terrorism, but gave no details. i think one of the reasons i wanted to have you here and jeremy here and the congressman is that what we have seen over the last four or five years is an expansion of the battlefield. and in the wake of the fact we're dealing with it appears suspects who are ethnically chechen, one was in dagestan, what would it look like for the u.s. and russia to cooperate more closely, and is that a bad idea, emma? >> well, i think that probably has been happening for quite a while now. but i think shared intelligence sources is a good idea generally, actually. but, you know, the
't happen in the bush administration, didn't happen in the obama administration, so that was never -- that's just not -- it's irrelevant at this point. now the case is under way. the fact that he was well enough to be arraigned on the complaint means now that the government will move to present this case in the grand jury, probably within a month there will be an indictment, and then the case will move to a federal district court. at that point, i expect things will slow down quite a bit. i would be surprised, given the magnitude and complexity of this case, that there could be a trial inside of a year, but at least now the process is under way. >> juliette, from a law enforcement standpoint, do you think it was the right decision to try him in civilian court? >> absolutely. like what jeff said, there is just really no debate about this. it's more of a political debate. for one, the law doesn't even cover him because he's a u.s. citizen. but from a law enforcement national security perspective, what better way to minimize the impact of terrorists than to treat them like criminals. that's w
: that tells us all lot about what the aclu tells us about the various methods by the bush administration and the obama administration. drone are among the tools. if this is another method of fighting terrorism -- guest: you can look at our website. there is a great deal of work in this area. somese of force in circumstances may be permitted when there is a threat. permissible. when those boundaries are expanded, it would be unlawful. we think the government has done the right thing. has, the federal government done the exact right thing by crimeng this as a federal that has to be investigated. . want to hone in on this the military is somehow better than our intelligence professionals and other agencies. i think it does them a great disservice to imply that. havenforcement, the fbi their role in other areas. was a to confuse the two terrible mistake under the bush administration. obamaa good thing the administration is not making that mistake now. with the aclu.si thank you so much. clifford may, president of the foundation for defense of democracies. column.s a weekly thank you to you a
limbo. by treating them as criminal suspects, the obama administration is avoiding all kinds of risks and simply acting as the bush administration has in the past and as they have acted in other terrorist cases by using the normal criminal procedures. >> because lindsey graham and others say, yes, he should be tried as a u.s. citizen, should be tried in a u.s. civilian court, but that can await this process of doing some serious interrogation of him and designating him as an enemy combatant in the meantime. all of this is moot right now, because as you know, yesterday, he was formally given his miranda rights and a judge magistrate at his bed side with a court-appointed attorney, a public defender. this is moot as the obama administration has made its decision. is lindsey graham on sound legal ground, saying he should be tried in a civilian court, but held and questioned as an enemy combatant? >> i think the only fair answer to that question is we don't know. because it's never been done before in american history to have some sort of hybrid combatant and criminal proceeding. we do kn
with the iraq war, perceived as the sort of crimes of the bush administration they wanted it to end and the obama administration has sold people a bill of goods. the idea that the drone war is actually clean. which is why i call it dirty wars. when you kill people in yemen, pakistan or somalia that aren't attached to terrorism, you're giving people an actual incentive to want to attack the united states. and so if you look at the poll numbers, liberals are very much lock step with the white house right now on this drone issue. no way -- >> stunning. >> no way -- >> that is stunning the same people, many of them calling for george w. bush's impeachment are calling for a war crimes trial after he left. and yet, again, this white house is actually, like you said, carried on a lot of the bush/cheney legacy in this area and made it far more intense, especially on drone strikes. >> also, one of the stories i do in the book. i was in yemen and somalia and afghanistan and elsewhere reporting the stories over the years. in somalia, i discovered that the obama administration is using a prison
. let him respond, please. >> i did. i sided with barack obama. sidedd with john kerry, i with barney frank to enis that your our entire country did not collapse. the bush administration turned a blind eye that a casino was set up in wall street. i did not support any of the bush administration financial regulations policies. but when the threat was the system was going to collapse and hurt every family in america, i did that to protect our financial system from collapsing and you did not. in addition, on telecommunication it was my egislation that broke down the telecom monopoly that led to a broadband revolution that created many millions of jobs in the united states of america. i'm very proud of that. my name is on the legislation and i'm proud that my name is on much of that legislation. it was my job to go to washington -- >> that's my point. that's my point. you said we were going to talk a this, you're proud of that and that is the problem. we have one cable company mcast that runs from here to washington, d.c. there is no companies. verizon has the whole market. open up your c
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)